Recent Comments

Answer Tips

Pinger

05 October 2012

As one who comes from a family fairly infested with medics, I was attracted to the story by its headline. Nothing more, I am not really monitoring the subject matter. They will get me anyhow in the end.

The plot of the story is contained in that sentence:

A 72-year-old man having a tumour removed from his kidney died after the chief anesthetist and nurse took a lunch break in the middle of the surgery.

If you absolutely insist that you need to know more, here is a bit more:

The 72-year-old went under anesthetic at 10.45am on the day of the operation, which took place in January 2011.At noon sharp, the head anesthetist left the operating room to go for lunch. Fifteen minutes later, the head nurse anesthetist also left the patient and went for lunch.No other anesthetist was called in to take over responsibility for the doctor who was on his lunch break.And while another nurse was brought in to cover for the nurse anesthetist, the nurse who arrived came from the orthopedic ward and wasn't familiar with the respirator to which the 72-year-old was attached.

Etc. And the man died.

But the plot as presented above misses the punchline. How significant is the punchline will be your judgment once you read it:

The incident, which took place at the Lidköping hospital, has prompted stinging criticism from Sweden's National Board of Health and Welfare (Socialstyrelsen).

Yup. Emphasis mine, if you wondered. And so:

No auto-da-fé for the chief anesthetist and his nurse in the square near the hospital

No waterboarding for the pair

No firing squad at sunset

No jail time

Not even a teeny-weeny "pack your things and leave the building in 15 minutes"